To get wound up at cycle races on public roads

[Ilovemyself]

It is so annoying to me when I am on a journey and come across a gaggle of cyclists on an organised race. Quite often they are 3 or 4 abreast and all over the road.

Racing on the public highway foe motorists is a serious offence. Why are cyclists allowed to race.

"Looking at the WHO stats, there are about 13 times as many cyclists in the Netherlands, and 5 times as many in Germany than in the UK"

That just strengthens my point - British drivers are among the best in Europe, yet there is high anti cyclist feeling with far lower numbers of cyclists - ergo, in Britain cyclists are the real problem.

" in the Netherlands, the deaths are significantly lower if you consider the number of bike trips - anyway, this is off topic."

No it's exactly on topic, the Netherlands has a huge network of cycle lanes, so cyclists are far less often on the roads. They are also taught safe cycling and the road rules at school. British drivers are having to deal with a far more complex driving situation, usually with poor or untrained trained cyclists to boot.

LazeyJaney, I'm not sure how you can argue that because cycling is more dangerous in Britain than in the Nethlands, it's because british drivers are better (at what, exactly?)

I now have visions of the British leg of the Tour De France - cyclists on sit-up-and-beg "bicycles" with mirrors and lights, multitude of crashes due to the peleton trying to ride at speed in cycle paths and Mark Cavendish's winning sprint halted mid flow, as he stops to let a car out in front of him to get access to the Tesco.

I nearly chocked on my biscuit!

Most of us do signal, but looking around is still the first warning. I'm not going to put my arm out until I'm sure there is nothing that is going to take my hand off. And we don;t indicate every time we over take a parked car or such, same as motorists don't! If there is a parked car, or a slower cyclist it is pretty obvious I am going to around it rather than through it! If I indicated right, I would expect the driver to think I was turning right.

There are certainly idiotic cyclists that don't indicate and do swerve across traffic, same as there are idiotic motorists who do the same. If everyone would use a little common sense and courtesy the road would be safer.

I am going to be grinning for the rest of the day at that mental image, LessMissAbs!

"There is high anti cyclist feeling with far lower numbers of cyclists - ergo, in Britain cyclists are the real problem"

Chuckle!

Lesmis - so why do motorbikes have mirrors? I'm not being snidey, I'm just genuinely interested, I'd like mirrors on my bike!

Chewing - cyclist definitely didn't know I was behind him, it was getting to the point where I was almost finding it funny that he could be so unaware, just meandering along the road.

And yes, obviously if you are much slower you should let the faster person past. We live in a touristy area and people who are pottering in their cars admiring the view pull over to let others past them, that's just being considerate! If I'm out riding my horse I don't just ride down the middle of the road holding everyone else up because 'it's not a crime to be slower'.

'Oh lazyjaney please spare me the cod-definitions of rights and responsibilities after the hash you made of confusing "should" and "must" in the last thread! I don't think I can take any more! We've already been subjected to the muddled statistical interpretation!"

Ah yes, I remember - you were the one who managed to twist and turn the Highway Code to mean "should ride two abreast through narrow roads, should never pull over for faster traffic, and should never be aware of following traffic" or whatever tosh it was you eventually muddled through to.

The inconvenient facts are that British motorists are among the safest in Europe, British cyclists are among the least well trained, so it's fairly obvious where the problem is.

Somehow I also doubt your ability to grasp the stats will be their problem

cyclists shouldn't wear headphones on the road, so he was at fault if he genuinely couldn't hear you because of that.

I would assume that going a lot faster, plus restricted vision due to a helmet would make looking around rather difficult.

It is possible to get mirrors for a bike if you really wanted them.

Right, I'm off to the post office and pick my kids up, on my bike, probably driving people like Janey nuts for daring to be on the road!

There are a number of pro-cycling lobbies that are trying to widen the dedicated cycle path network in the UK - perhaps lazyjaney wants to get involved?

There are several pavements with pictures of bicycles on them round my way - it is laughable to think of these as cycle paths. They are littered with thorns, stones and broken glass; they are overhung by trees and hedges; they are too narrow for two people to comfortably walk two abreast - though often have pedestrians attempting to do so; and are frequently broken by give way lines for driveways and similar. Given that I cycle down these roads at speeds varying between 13 and 20mph (depending on the wind), it would be inconvenient at best and dangerous at worst to use the "cycle paths". I'd rather not be dealing with aggressive drivers, but needs must. So, the more people getting behind the campaign for better cycling infrastructure the better - come on, angry drivers, put your names to it, this will benefit you.

"There is high anti cyclist feeling with far lower numbers of cyclists - ergo, in Britain cyclists are the real problem"

Oh please.High anti cyclist feeling with fewer cyclists can mean pretty much anything - how about "ergo ,British motorists are more aggressive" or "ergo,the way to reduce anti cyclist feeling is to increase the number of cyclists"

But what would you want him to do?? Get out of your way. Why? Just because he was going slower than you in a narrow lane whe he had every right to be there?

I think you forget that many of these pesky, inhabitants of 'Wankerdom' are also drivers.

They have not beamed in from planet Lycra to spoil your day. Most are well aware of their rights and responsibilites on the road and they very often also have a car as well.

Regarding the high anti cyclist feeling yes that is sadly true. My dad and dh are competitive cyclists so I grew up with tales of near misses, road abuse and sadly deaths.

Are the cyclists always the problem? Well sometimes there are idiots in all things but the majority are not, I think.

Despite increased popularity and awareness regarding cycling, there is still in ingrained cultural bias in the Uk motorist to see cycling as a huge inconvenience and obstacle to them and their car. A car trumps a puny bike, so make way.

Years ago it was seen as haha funny clothes, stupid saddles, something forrin and therefore to be sneered at. Still some way to go on that I think

I thought the main reason bikes don't have mirrors was that mirrors are less safe - a mirror on a bike gives only a very restricted view of what is behind,unlike turning your head to look. Also the mirror would be moving a lot as the bike moved. Add that to being able to hear what is going on,and mirrors wouldn't help.

I think cycling with earphones in is the height of stupidity,you need to be able to hear what is going on around you.

I think you're right, Chew. It's one reason that when I'm out on my road bike I'm extra friendly, cheerful and courteous to people - greasing the wheels of public opinion is no bad thing. I try to behave in the same manner when I'm on a horse, driving a car, or walking as well.

Some cyclists are dicks. Some drivers are dicks. Most people are not, and their mode of transport is irrelevant. Don't judge a whole group of people by the actions of a minority, and remember that there are people involved - perhas even people you might know, or like!

I just want to state that I never said in my OP I was anti cyclist. Just frustrated at those that ride dangerously or not in accordance with the Highway Code, the same as any other road users. The trouble is I regularly come across cyclists that ride dangerously or not in accordance with the Highway Code so they were the ones that were foremost in my mind.

On a police riding course I was told that no road user should force another to brake or change direction by their actions (so having to slow down and overtake is the obvious exception). If that is the case they should be more aware of what is going on around them.

It is not just the overtaking drivers responsibly to pass safely, it is a shared responsibility and the person being overtaken should as be responsible for their actions ( regardless of what they are driving or riding)

If these dangerous cyclists are on their own, there's not much you can do. But if it's a big group being foolish - a club ride or a sportive - then why not drop a line to the cycling club organising (riders are likely to wear club jerseys, so you'll be able to identify them) and let them know that you are finding dangerous riding happening on a regular basis. They will already have guidelines in place to remind people not to be dicks, but a reminder may be in order.

Fair point. It is so easy to be vocal on a forum but sit on your backside and do nothing

Quite often they are 3 or 4 abreast

This is because it's often safer. It means that although cars have to go wider, they don't have to travel as far to overtake and don't pull out thinking there's just one cyclist when actually there are several to get round.

Lazyjaney Ah yes, I remember - you were the one who managed to twist and turn the Highway Code to mean "should ride two abreast through narrow roads, should never pull over for faster traffic, and should never be aware of following traffic" or whatever tosh it was you eventually muddled through to

I'm not sure what you are referring to in this diatribe exactly, but I'm pretty sure even I can remember that it was a different poster who said this. It was the one who pointed out that you had the definitions of normal words in the English language wrong - I was one of the ones who reminded you that you weren't a lawyer and were making a hash of interpreting the law.

I'm not being funny, but if you drive with as little attention to detail as your posting style implies, I'm not surprised you keep having problems with the existence of other road users.

The 3 or 4 abreast comment was because they are on a very narrow road and it makes it difficult to actually pass them or at least pass them safely.

British cyclists are among the least well trained, so it's fairly obvious where the problem is

Would that include Sir Bradley Wiggins then?

This is brilliant, do keep them coming!

I'm not a driver, I'm not a cyclist. I am a pedestrian and London public transport user. I'm just going to fan the flames by saying that I've narrowly avoided injury several times recently due to cyclists running red lights, riding on pavements etc.
I've got no love for over-entitled drivers either, it's just that none of them have threatened my safety recently.

and Sir Chris Hoy! He is lovely. My eldest son was lucky enough to have a cycle coaching session with him, he was brilliant with the kids.

OMG Lazyjaney

Getting accurate figures is tricky but there are roughly 34 million cars in the UK vs 13 million bikes. Conversely there are about 8 million cars in the Netherlands. I couldn't find the number of bikes but the population is roughly 17 million and allegedly there are approx 1.1 per person.

I'm no Einstien but even with those figures it's clear that cars outnumber bikes in the UK whereas bikes outnumber cars in the Netherlands. Thus criticising someone for their ability to grasp stats is perhaps a little wayward.

Clearly you know nothing about cycling in Europe as it is well known that the Netherlands is one of the safest places to ride a bike.

if all the cycle commuters got into cars I think you'll find your journey time suddenly increased as the roads would be gridlocked.
I reckon that should happen one day. Just too see.

*I agree that the sort of cycling you've described is poor but if you look at the highway code, the overtaking example shown in the photo shows the car in the opposing lane. This swerving is really no different than being blown sideways by a strong wind.

But ultimately if you can read the road then it is quite obvious what other road users are going to do. If not then perhaps an advanced driving course would be appropriate.*

That is just so typical of the arrogant, entitled attitude which causes bad feeling between cyclists and car drivers in the first place.

The three men concern were behaving irresponsibly and dangerously in lane one of a dual carriageway while other vehicles were, quite reasonably, overtaking them. The cyclists were racing and started swerving into lane two despite the presence of another vehicle and it is the driver of the other vehicle who should be patronised and advised to improve their driving skills.

These cyclists should not have been racing and trying to stop each other overtaking. Had they been taking a sensible line down the centre of lane one, checking over their shoulders and overtaking each other in a safe and sensible manner, when there was a gap in lane two, as befits any road user, nobody need have been put at risk.

Are you suggesting that nobody should overtake cyclists on a dual carriageway just in case they start overtaking each other without looking and swerving into the path of another vehicle? That could make for some enormous, very slow moving tailbacks.

Why not just behave responsibly with due consideration for other road users? That is what I was doing.